UU's, The Bible, and the Council of Nicea - 05/15/2005

Dear Sir,

Upon reviewing your site as further reading for a class in school, I must
say I'm a little unclear as to why you labeled Unitarian Universalists as
a cult.  So far your logic seems rather flawed.  As a 17 year old who is
trying desperately to understand the way the universe works and where I
fit in it, I was rather shocked that you would call the Unitarian
Universalist Church dangerous. 

The Unitarian Universalist movement mainly stresses people to search out
and discover for themselves how they can best relate to God.  It also
stresses tolerance in its followers, which is something that is very
important in this day and age.

Sir, what if the Bible is not the word of God?  It was written at the
council of Nicea by many powerful bishops of the time, not directly by God
Himself.  I think that taking the general message of the Bible is far more
important than picking apart every word.  The Bible preaches peace and the
message of Christ, but as written by the powerful men of the fourth
century, not written by God directly.  There are political undertones
throughout the entirety of the Bible, sir, potentially put in place by
powerful political figures of the time, and not by God.

The reason that I do not believe that UU is a cult is because all they do
is preach tolerance and beg the followers of UU to seek knowledge and find
God for themselves.  How is this a cult?



Hi Caroline.  Many people ask why we label something as a cult.  We classify any religion that rejects the absolute truth of the Word of God (the Bible) as a cult, in accordance with the following definition from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary: "a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious".  Since we believe absolute truth to be found in the Bible, then any religion that rejects that truth is false, and therefore, a cult.  Some people may define cult differently, but that is the definition we use when classifying Unitarian Universalism as a cult.  I encourage you to read the following articles.  The first addresses why we do what we do, whereas the second article addresses some of the specific UU beliefs that lead us to refer to them as a cult:
You're a little misguided regarding the writing and transmission of the Bible.  You said the Bible was written by powerful bishops at the Council of Nicea.  That's actually not true.  The Old Testament of the Bible was written by prophets between about 1400 B.C. and 400 B.C.  The New Testament of the Bible was written by Apostles and Jesus' disciples between about A.D. 50 and A.D. 95.  There were two Councils of Nicea.  The first Council of Nicea (A.D. 325) was convened to counter the Arian heresy that denied the deity of Jesus Christ.  This council reaffirmed the Trinity.  The Second Council of Nicea (A.D. 787) was convened to address the matter of iconoclasm.  The councils addressed other minor issues, such as whether or not bishops should be paid, but these matters were the crux of the Nicene councils.  Now, I think you're referring to the Council of Hippo (A.D. 393) and the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397).  These councils were convened to decide the canon of Scripture.  None of the Bible was written at these councils.  The Bible had been complete, and the individual books were used by concensus for a few centuries at this point.  These councils undertook to decide which of these books were historically accurate, agreed with accepted Scripture, had a certain authorship, and carried apostolic authority, among other things.  However, I must repeat, the Bible had been complete for a few centuries by this point (since. A.D. 95).  Now, we can be sure that this is true, as ancient biblical manuscripts, dating to the first and second century have been found.  Foreign translations of the biblical books have been found from the early centuries, and if we didn't have any ancient biblical manuscripts, we could reconstruct 98% of the New Testament simply from assembling the passages quoted by early church fathers. 
The Bible was written by men, but they wrote it under the direct inspiration of God.  2 Peter 1:21 says, "For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit." 2 Timothy 3:16 says, "All Scripture is Godbreathed (inspired) and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness".  Now I'm not a person led by blind faith.  I'm dismayed by those who are.  However, the advanced scientific knowledge revealed in the Old and New Testament, coupled with the historical accuracy of the Bible and the PRECISE fulfillment of prophetcy leads any thinking, reasonable person to conclude that the Bible is the product of divine inspiration.  The mathematical probability against the precise fulfillment of these prophecies makes it an essential impossibility, but it happened.  We're not talking about vague "horoscope" type predicitions either, for which it is relatively easy to find a fulfillment.  Please read the articles above.  I hope they answer your questions. 
In Christ,
Ben Rast
Contender Ministries